From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HVXAF-000697-P1 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:10:00 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l2PI8uvl007830; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:08:56 GMT Received: from webmail1.sd.dreamhost.com (webmail1.sd.dreamhost.com [66.33.201.159]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l2PI5Gta002443 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:05:16 GMT Received: from webmail.scriptkitty.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by webmail1.sd.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66BCC2C178 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 11:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 67.180.39.52 (SquirrelMail authenticated user antarus@scriptkitty.com) by webmail.scriptkitty.com with HTTP; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 11:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <56513.67.180.39.52.1174845913.squirrel@webmail.scriptkitty.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1174788467.4883.29.camel@bruichladdich> <200703251100.00415.vapier@gentoo.org> <20070325160719.0a4d15c3@snowflake> <200703251116.13901.vapier@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 11:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposed addition to the Social Contract From: "Alec Warner" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.9a Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 7b4e3359-75ce-4429-9946-779975b6d588 X-Archives-Hash: b6fb42346a1fb74bd0de54e9463c2a16 > I'd like to ask what are the negative side-effects of adding such > paragraph. Are there any true negative side-effects to a specification > like that? > > A different topic is the way the paragraph is written. If we don't > like how it is written, we can change it and problem solved. > > To be honest, protecting ourselves from things that now seem > improbable, isn't such a bad idea. At best, we can only make some sort of effort to meet it. Enforcing something like 'not relying on one vendor' requires basically either money from us or good will from others. It's not like we can co-locate our machines whereever we want or use any software that we wish or use as much bandwidth as we wish. The OSL and GNi and Indiana State University have been kind enough to host many of our machines. I don't think anyone claims it's easy (except maybe patrick) to find new hosting providers or new machines. We have new machines coming; I have no idea where they are being hosted. I assume Infra isn't dumb enough to put all our machines in one place, I trust them to make intelligent choices about our Infrastructure, thats why they exist. -Alec -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list